Skip to main content

Assessment of Clinical Guideline Models Based on Metrics for Business Process Models

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Knowledge Representation for Health Care (KR4HC 2014)

Abstract

The formalisation of clinical guidelines is a long and demanding task which usually involves both clinical and IT staff. Because of the features of guideline representation languages, a clear understanding of the final guideline model may prove complicated for clinicians. In this context, an assessment of the understandability of the guideline model becomes crucial. In the field of Business Process Modelling (BPM) there is research on structural metrics and their connection with the quality of process models, concretely with understandability and modifiability. In this paper we adapt the structural metrics that have been proposed in the field of BPM in terms of the features of a specific guideline representation language, which is PROforma. Additionally, we present some experiments consisting in the application of these adapted metrics to the assessment of guideline models described in PROforma. Although it has not been possible to draw meaningful conclusions on the overall quality of the models, our experiments have served to shed light on important aspects to be considered, such as the hierarchical decomposition of processes.

This work has been supported by Universitat Jaume I through the research project P1\(\cdot \)1B2013-15.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 34.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sonnenberg, F., Hagerty, C.: Computer-interpretable clinical practice guidelines. where are we and where are we going? In: IMIA Yearbook of Medical Informatics pp. 145–158 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mendling, J.: Metrics for Business Process Models. In: Metrics for Business Process Models. Empirical Foundations of Verification, Error Prediction, and Guidelines for Correctness. LNBIP, vol. 6. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Sánchez González, L., García Rubio, F., Ruiz González, F., Piattini Velthuis, M.: Measurement in business processes: a systematic review. Bus. Process. Manage. J. 16(1), 114–134 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sánchez-González, L., García, F., Mendling, J., Ruiz, F.: Quality assessment of business process models based on thresholds. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T.S., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2010. LNCS, vol. 6426, pp. 78–95. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Mendling, J., Reijers, H., van der Aalst, W.: Seven process modeling guidelines (7PMG). Inf. Softw. Technol. 52(2), 127–136 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sadiq, W., Orlowska, M.E.: Applying graph reduction techniques for identifying structural conflicts in process models. In: Jarke, M., Oberweis, A. (eds.) CAiSE 1999. LNCS, vol. 1626, p. 195. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Fox, J., Johns, N., Rahmanzadeh, A.: Disseminating medical knowledge: the PROforma approach. Artif. Intell. Med. 14(1–2), 157–182 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration in Cognitive Science & Systems Engineering: Tallis training. http://archive.cossac.org/tallis/index.html. Accessed April 2014

  9. Mohler, J.L., Armstrong, A.J., Bahnson, R.R., Boston, B., Busby, J.E., D’Amico, A.V., Eastham, J.A., Enke, C.A., Farrington, T., Higano, C.S., Horwitz, E.M., Kantoff, P.W., Kawachi, M.H., Kuettel, M., Lee, R.J., MacVicar, G.R., Malcolm, A.W., Miller, D., Plimack, E.R., Pow-Sang, J.M., Roach 3rd, M., Rohren, E., Rosenfeld, S., Srinivas, S., Strope, S.A., Tward, J., Twardowski, P., Walsh, P.C., Ho, M., Shead, D.A.: Prostate cancer, version 3.2012: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines. J. Natl. Compr. Canc. Netw. 10(9), 1081–1087 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0. Technical report, OMG (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Martínez-Salvador, B., Marcos, M., Sánchez, A.: An algorithm for guideline transformation: from BPMN to PROforma. In: Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Knowledge Representation for Health Care (KR4HC 2014) (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Reijers, H., Mendling, J., Dijkman, R.: Human and automatic modularizations of process models to enhance their comprehension. Inf. Syst. 36(5), 881–897 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mar Marcos .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Marcos, M., Torres-Sospedra, J., Martínez-Salvador, B. (2014). Assessment of Clinical Guideline Models Based on Metrics for Business Process Models. In: Miksch, S., Riaño, D., ten Teije, A. (eds) Knowledge Representation for Health Care. KR4HC 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8903. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13281-5_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13281-5_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13280-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13281-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics